Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12016181›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2002

Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review.

Phil Edwards, Ian Roberts, Mike Clarke, Carolyn DiGuiseppi, Sarah Pratap, Reinhard Wentz, Irene Kwan

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05040646 (Study Protocol - The Development of a Novel Patient Reported Outcomes Measure Committed to the Watch-and-wait Program for Rectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 497 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
497citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05040646 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Study Protocol - The Development of a Novel Patient Reported Outcomes Measure Committed to the Watch-and-wait Program for Rectal Cancer: An International Delphi Study Protocol

TypeobservationalSponsorMaastricht University Medical CenterRan2021 to 2023Enrolled80ConditionsRectal CancerArmsDelphi exercise
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

497 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Methods to increase response to postal and electronic questionnaires.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

437 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Phil EdwardsCRASH Trial Co-ordinating Centre, Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London WC1B 1DP. phil.edwards@lshtm.ac.uk
Ian Roberts
Mike Clarke
Carolyn DiGuiseppi
Sarah Pratap
Reinhard Wentz
Irene Kwan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo identify methods to increase response to postal questionnaires.

designSystematic review of randomised controlled trials of any method to influence response to postal questionnaires. STUDIES REVIEWED: 292 randomised controlled trials including 258 315 participants INTERVENTION REVIEWED: 75 strategies for influencing response to postal questionnaires.

main outcome measureThe proportion of completed or partially completed questionnaires returned.

resultsThe odds of response were more than doubled when a monetary incentive was used (odds ratio 2.02; 95% confidence interval 1.79 to 2.27) and almost doubled when incentives were not conditional on response (1.71; 1.29 to 2.26). Response was more likely when short questionnaires were used (1.86; 1.55 to 2.24). Personalised questionnaires and letters increased response (1.16; 1.06 to 1.28), as did the use of coloured ink (1.39; 1.16 to 1.67). The odds of response were more than doubled when the questionnaires were sent by recorded delivery (2.21; 1.51 to 3.25) and increased when stamped return envelopes were used (1.26; 1.13 to 1.41) and questionnaires were sent by first class post (1.12; 1.02 to 1.23). Contacting participants before sending questionnaires increased response (1.54; 1.24 to 1.92), as did follow up contact (1.44; 1.22 to 1.70) and providing non-respondents with a second copy of the questionnaire (1.41; 1.02 to 1.94). Questionnaires designed to be of more interest to participants were more likely to be returned (2.44; 1.99 to 3.01), but questionnaires containing questions of a sensitive nature were less likely to be returned (0.92; 0.87 to 0.98). Questionnaires originating from universities were more likely to be returned than were questionnaires from other sources, such as commercial organisations (1.31; 1.11 to 1.54).

conclusionsHealth researchers using postal questionnaires can improve the quality of their research by using the strategies shown to be effective in this systematic review.

Indexed as

Surveys and QuestionnairesData CollectionData Interpretation, StatisticalHumansMotivationPostal ServiceRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID12016181
PMCPMC111107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.